All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Can Bigs Become More Effective Please?
4/2/2013 9:45 PM
This guy is a monster, and should be averaging a lot more points (especially in a weak conference). Look at him: http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=2336503

99 ATH and 98 LP (I know the Free Throw Shooting is bad, but still) and he's only averaging 15 PPG, and with only decent effiency. I mean how good does a big have to be to be really effective. This guy is about as good as it gets (besides the poor free throw shooting).
Sorry for the rant, it's just not realistic, and it should be changed. (I sent a ticket).
4/2/2013 10:03 PM
Are you willing to share your distribution numbers? The bare stats aren't enough for anyone to know whether you have a valid point.
4/2/2013 10:03 PM
The only thing keeping it from being a really good efficiency IS his free throw shooting.

4/2/2013 10:16 PM
...he's shooting 53% and averaging 15/game while being a horrible FT shooter (he's missed almost 60FT's, so that's costing you at least a point per game if he was even 75% from the line).  

He's pretty damn effective, especially considering most of your guards have below average passer ratings, so he's likely not getting the ball in great position part of the time.
4/2/2013 10:49 PM
15 ppt is just fine for who that guy is. To get more than that, even with a truly great player yo have to go overboard on distro
4/2/2013 11:11 PM
I personally think that to be a truly elite post scorer (20+ PPG), you also need a sizable speed advantage over your opponent (and 33 speed isn't probably high enough...probably need somewhere around 60+) in addition to the required disto (that or you'll need adequate FT skill to be a more efficient scorer).
4/3/2013 12:29 AM
Posted by buddhagamer on 4/2/2013 11:11:00 PM (view original):
I personally think that to be a truly elite post scorer (20+ PPG), you also need a sizable speed advantage over your opponent (and 33 speed isn't probably high enough...probably need somewhere around 60+) in addition to the required disto (that or you'll need adequate FT skill to be a more efficient scorer).
Wow, I didn't know speed was so important for bigs. But I guess my point is this guy has about the equivalent skill set one would think Shaq or Dwight Howard (maybe if he was a bit better at blocking shots) would have. And yet, he's not like a prolific scorer (he's only decently efficient) like Shaq was in college (and in the pros), or Dwight would've been if he went to college. I just don't think he, or any other big for that matter, is as efficient as they should and need to be. Implementing a change where bigs are more efficient scorers would add realism, and would just make the game better. It's not really fair that guards are the only guys who can be efficient unless the big has a freakishly good skill set, which is maybe only one or two guys in a class, and in real life their are a TON of efficient bigs.
4/3/2013 1:14 AM
Even the best bigs in college ball now aren't that much more dominant than your guy. Just thinking of two of the more prominent guys this season Cody Zeller and Mason Plumlee. Zeller scored 16.8 PGG on 57.7% and Plumlee was 17.2 on 58.9%. Thats not that big of a difference from your guy and its not impossible to have a guy get close to those numbers in HD.
4/3/2013 7:48 AM
And Zeller shot 75% from the line while Plumlee was around 69%... Both much higher than your big.
4/3/2013 10:24 AM
Posted by m4284850 on 4/3/2013 12:29:00 AM (view original):
Posted by buddhagamer on 4/2/2013 11:11:00 PM (view original):
I personally think that to be a truly elite post scorer (20+ PPG), you also need a sizable speed advantage over your opponent (and 33 speed isn't probably high enough...probably need somewhere around 60+) in addition to the required disto (that or you'll need adequate FT skill to be a more efficient scorer).
Wow, I didn't know speed was so important for bigs. But I guess my point is this guy has about the equivalent skill set one would think Shaq or Dwight Howard (maybe if he was a bit better at blocking shots) would have. And yet, he's not like a prolific scorer (he's only decently efficient) like Shaq was in college (and in the pros), or Dwight would've been if he went to college. I just don't think he, or any other big for that matter, is as efficient as they should and need to be. Implementing a change where bigs are more efficient scorers would add realism, and would just make the game better. It's not really fair that guards are the only guys who can be efficient unless the big has a freakishly good skill set, which is maybe only one or two guys in a class, and in real life their are a TON of efficient bigs.
So I guess this means you're not willing to share your distro numbers. That's cool, I respect the choice.

For a guy who gets 28 minutes a game and is one of three main scorers on the team, absent other information, 15 PPG seems totally reasonable to me.
4/3/2013 10:37 AM
Posted by blackdog3377 on 4/3/2013 1:14:00 AM (view original):
Even the best bigs in college ball now aren't that much more dominant than your guy. Just thinking of two of the more prominent guys this season Cody Zeller and Mason Plumlee. Zeller scored 16.8 PGG on 57.7% and Plumlee was 17.2 on 58.9%. Thats not that big of a difference from your guy and its not impossible to have a guy get close to those numbers in HD.
I'm arguing that a guy SHOULD be able to put up those kind of numbers in HD consistently (all I ask is for one or two guys a class). I've only seen that kind of efficiency maybe once. It's impossible for a big to put up Plumlee #'s, and it shouldn't be.
4/3/2013 10:42 AM
You could just give him more distro...
4/3/2013 11:04 AM
Looking at the 2012 NCAA Division 1 regular season scoring leaders, 18 of the top 20 scorers on a PPG basis are guards, HD seems to match up with that...
4/3/2013 12:01 PM
Posted by m4284850 on 4/3/2013 10:37:00 AM (view original):
Posted by blackdog3377 on 4/3/2013 1:14:00 AM (view original):
Even the best bigs in college ball now aren't that much more dominant than your guy. Just thinking of two of the more prominent guys this season Cody Zeller and Mason Plumlee. Zeller scored 16.8 PGG on 57.7% and Plumlee was 17.2 on 58.9%. Thats not that big of a difference from your guy and its not impossible to have a guy get close to those numbers in HD.
I'm arguing that a guy SHOULD be able to put up those kind of numbers in HD consistently (all I ask is for one or two guys a class). I've only seen that kind of efficiency maybe once. It's impossible for a big to put up Plumlee #'s, and it shouldn't be.
Ive had big put up numbers like that before so it definitely is possible. You just have to give them a lot of distro. The best big I ever had scored 21 a game on 57% his senior year.
4/3/2013 3:35 PM
Your premise that guys like this don't exist is just not true.  I had this guy graduate last year.  Against a top 40 SOS, he scored 25.2 ppg (led the country) on slightly over 50% shooting (I didn't keep his shooting % numbers, but I am pretty sure it was about 51.5%).  On this team, there were 3 freshmen starters, so definitely not a great supporting cast, and we went 23-7, won our division in the ACC, and went to the 2nd round of the NT.  He was 1st-team all-american.  He was dominant for a team starting 3 freshmen, so I'm sure he was getting doubled every single game and still managed to lead a mediocre supporting cast to a 2nd round NT appearance (I was an 8 seed).  I'd say he was pretty damn effective.  
of 2
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Can Bigs Become More Effective Please?

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.